It is debated whether criminal behaviour is mainly caused by genetic predisposition or by environmental circumstances. In my view, although biological traits such as impulsiveness may increase the risk of offending, poor living conditions and limited opportunities have a much stronger influence on whether people commit crimes.
On the one hand, biological traits may increase a person’s tendency towards aggression. A person who is naturally impulsive may find it difficult to control anger and may be more likely to break the law. Moreover, anger issues can lead to impulsive actions. For instance, a person with poor impulse control may react violently during a conflict, especially if they have never learned effective ways to manage anger. As a result, genetic predisposition to impulsiveness may increase the risk of criminal behaviour.
On the other hand, people who grow up in deprived areas may be more exposed to crime and may have fewer legal opportunities to improve their lives. People living in poverty may lack the education or work experience needed to find stable employment, which lead them to engage in criminal activity. In addition, it is often argued that areas with a low quality of life have higher rates of petty crimes such as theft, which may be committed because of basic needs. Therefore, people in deprived communities may see crime as a way to survive, especially when legal opportunities are limited.
In conclusion, while biology may influence traits such as impulsiveness or emotional control, it does not automatically make someone a criminal. In many cases, poverty, lack of education, and exposure to criminal role models create conditions in which crime appears to be the easiest option. Therefore, the social environment is more important because it affects not only people’s behaviour but also the choices available to them.